Holmgren/Heckert/Haskell: What's the Plan?

[Enigmatic Evil]

Hey, Alex Smith would look like he was on a WHOLE OTHER LEVEL if he jumped ship to the CFL!

Or they might just shut him down and make him look like nothing special because his inconsistancies would follow him to that league too.

I'm not saying that it would happen that was just more of a hypothetical than anything else.

I've supported Alex Smith since he entered the league. San Fran is one of those teams I've always liked to cheer for since the Steve Young/Jerry Rice days. He just hasn't taken off in San Fransisco, it's one thing to CHEER for the guy but to try and praise him like he's the third coming of a Montana/Young is bizarre and it's really foolish. Nobody is going to argue that he has or has not shown anything because he has played some good games. He's just not at the level you wish he was at, and you would expect a 6th year player would show he could play at that level CONSISTENTLY by now. Alex Smith has not shown that.

[Alo]

Originally Posted by King of Kings

The problem is still, it was a first round pick. Out of 5 they've used in the last two years only 2 are contributing anything, Thomas and Moreno. Not a good situation when out of the other 3 oe is already been cut, one sucks on defense and your last one is Tim Teblow.

Robert Ayers is starting to get his shit together: he's notched 1.5 sacks in the first two games.

[Alo]

Originally Posted by Flugel

Andrew Luck is getting Jim Harbaugh's coaching at Stanford so that's somebody who might have a headstart coming out. I'd say PLUS he's from Stanford but how much is that helping Trent Edwards right about now? He's backing up a journeyman from Harvard as the face of Buffalo's Wonderlic'n Good Passing game. God bless those poor fans!

Source: Buffalo Bills shopping benched QB Trent Edwards - ESPN

[damajuki]

Originally Posted by King of Kings

He took Chicago to the playoffs in a shit situation. Everytime he came in to replace Grossman he'd pull out the win. Taking over for a Denver team in transition he took them to 6-0 before the playcalling fell apart yet got them to 8-8 while ranking #11 in the NFL with a 63% completion percentage and something like 21 TD's to 11 INT's. He doesn't throw a sexy ball or look very fun but he's 27 years old, he wins games and he has experience. If we can bring him in that opens up the draft. Sign him THEN grab A.J. Greene for him to throw to.

Like I said, if he can replicate or better his NFLQB ranking stat WITHOUT Brandon Marshall or Tony Sheffler to throw to? He is the real deal and worth exploring.

KoK, you're on fire recently, buddy. Good stuff.

And take it from a Bears fan that watched those teams closely: he was always better than Grossman and got the rawest deal ever while in Chicago. It was the weirdest thing to watch how the team seemed to go out of its way to keep him off the field. Seemed like a classic case of "higher draft pick wins" instead of "best QB wins" because Grossman was always DA-esque and yet Orton got NO love for his stellar play his rookie year when he led the team to 10 wins.

Another reason for the lack of love is exactly why shep doesn't like him: he's absolutely boring and vanilla. He doesn't talk a lot, he doesn't shave a lot (his nickname in Chicago was "Neck beard" for a time), he doesn't date hot B-list celebrities, he doesn't seem to care about the trappings of being an NFL QB and he doesn't put up huge numbers.

He just wins. BORING.

Check out his last year in Chicago and first in Denver. Anyone telling me we wouldn't KILL for this kind of QB (that Chicago stupidly traded away?):

Bears in 2008:

272

465

58.5

2,972

6.4

18

12

Denver in 2009:

336

541

62.1

3,802

7.0

21

12

Anyway, I think KoK brings up a great point about signing up a young, professional winner to lead this team.

It's actually a great way to spend your cap dollars and build quickly into a winner.

[Crow]

Kyle Orton has to be better than Jake Delhomme or Seneca Wallace

And someone is going to have to hold down the fort while No. 1 All-In-Resources-On-A-QB is developing

[OzDawg]

The "Plan" is probably so far above and beyond what forum posters think it's not worth discussing?

[King of Kings]

Originally Posted by damajuki

KoK, you're on fire recently, buddy. Good stuff.

And take it from a Bears fan that watched those teams closely: he was always better than Grossman and got the rawest deal ever while in Chicago. It was the weirdest thing to watch how the team seemed to go out of its way to keep him off the field. Seemed like a classic case of "higher draft pick wins" instead of "best QB wins" because Grossman was always DA-esque and yet Orton got NO love for his stellar play his rookie year when he led the team to 10 wins.

Another reason for the lack of love is exactly why shep doesn't like him: he's absolutely boring and vanilla. He doesn't talk a lot, he doesn't shave a lot (his nickname in Chicago was "Neck beard" for a time), he doesn't date hot B-list celebrities, he doesn't seem to care about the trappings of being an NFL QB and he doesn't put up huge numbers.

He just wins. BORING.

Check out his last year in Chicago and first in Denver. Anyone telling me we wouldn't KILL for this kind of QB (that Chicago stupidly traded away?):

Bears in 2008:

Denver in 2009:

Anyway, I think KoK brings up a great point about signing up a young, professional winner to lead this team.

It's actually a great way to spend your cap dollars and build quickly into a winner.

Thanks buddy! My infatuation with Orton stems from the Chicago days. It started out I kept noticing everytime Orton was tossed in there the Bears put up points and won games. Then I started paying closer attention and noticed that hey, this kids pretty good. You're right, he's boring. You won't find any exciting plays with him laying 50 yard bombs followed by a no huddle and a TD throw. What you WILL find is a guy who will move the chains and pull out the win. You'll also find a guy whose 27 and if he had a really good running game(Knowshon is always hurt and the others are ancient), more than one good WR and a good defense? Will get you into the playoffs as he did with Chicago. He will also, as we're seeing with Demaryius Thomas, have your rookie WR's playing at a high level.

Btw, he's currently ranked 2nd in passing yards in the NFL. If we can get the kid? I'd be all over it. That's exactly what we need right now. No, no it isn't pretty to look at and can be boring but I find winning more exciting then seeing a bunch of ESPN highlight reels. I'm OK with that.

[Shep]

The year Chicago benched Orton he had a passer rating in the 50s. Not really a crazy thing to do. He wasn't causing any wins. He was just present.

That said, he's better now. I do NOT see him as a Super Bowl quarterback. Maybe a spaceholder for Luck.

[damajuki]

Originally Posted by Shep

The year Chicago benched Orton he had a passer rating in the 50s. Not really a crazy thing to do. He wasn't causing any wins. He was just present.

That said, he's better now. I do NOT see him as a Super Bowl quarterback. Maybe a spaceholder for Luck.

Yes, it's true that his rookie year Orton finished with a passer rating of 55.4. He also "didn't cause" 11 wins. As a rookie thrust into action when Grossman got hurt. He may not have helped win those games but he sure didn't lose them either.

A better figure is the 78 passer rating and nearly 3000 yards he put up in his one and only year as the starter in Chicago in 2008.

I don't know what you mean by "Super Bowl winning QB", anyway. Eli Manning isn't going to go down as a great QB but he won a Super Bowl; he was good enough to help his outstanding D get there (and then good enough to help them win it). I don't think Eli is markedly better than Orton.

Not that getting to a Super Bowl means much for a QB. Grossman "led" the Bears to a Super Bowl, and he had to have been one of the worst QBs to ever get there. Who knows? Maybe if Orton plays that game, the Bears don't turn it over as much and win.

Which is the main positive about Orton: he completes a good percentage of balls and doesn't make dumb plays that kill you.

Not a bad QB to build around.

[Tobalaz]

Chicago had a running game when Orton was there and that was it.
They had NO weapons at wr or te.

[Sez.EJ]

No reason JDH cannot be resigned to hold that clipboard.

[Shep]

I don't mean he couldn't be a guy along for the ride (and I don't think he's as good as Manning anyway)... but I don't think he's the quarterback that makes you a Super Bowl team or perennial winner.

He might become The Luckiest Quarterback on Earth again (like he has been for two years)... but that's not all that exciting. I'd like our best player at the most important position. It's the plan that keeps on working.

Teams that win in spite of their quarterback, or with only decent QB play, don't tend to be those teams that win year after year after year (like in that article).

And I don't think there's a GM around who thinks Orton is more than pretty good.

Originally Posted by damajuki

Yes, it's true that his rookie year Orton finished with a passer rating of 55.4. He also "didn't cause" 11 wins. As a rookie thrust into action when Grossman got hurt. He may not have helped win those games but he sure didn't lose them either.

A better figure is the 78 passer rating and nearly 3000 yards he put up in his one and only year as the starter in Chicago in 2008.

I don't know what you mean by "Super Bowl winning QB", anyway. Eli Manning isn't going to go down as a great QB but he won a Super Bowl; he was good enough to help his outstanding D get there (and then good enough to help them win it). I don't think Eli is markedly better than Orton.

Not that getting to a Super Bowl means much for a QB. Grossman "led" the Bears to a Super Bowl, and he had to have been one of the worst QBs to ever get there. Who knows? Maybe if Orton plays that game, the Bears don't turn it over as much and win.

Which is the main positive about Orton: he completes a good percentage of balls and doesn't make dumb plays that kill you.

Not a bad QB to build around.